Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

by Simon 286 Replies latest social current

  • freemindfade
    The law SHOULD protect these people against discrimination in the service industry.

    But the law won't. All they have to do is say sorry, I'm booked. You can't ban how people think. You can shame them in nonexistence online, and censor what they say, but you can't criminalize thoughts. Laws just give people a false sense of accomplishment, beating those bad guys.

    The law will not make homophobic people make cakes for gay people, it will simply limit their speech. End of story, they can still refuse service and give zero reasons. Discrimination still fully intact.

  • freemindfade
    If someone wanted a MAGA cake making and a gay baker refused, would that baker be threatened and harassed and prosecuted for it? The law should not be used as a club for certain groups. If it is, then there is something wrong with the law. This decision corrected that in this case.

    My point exactly

  • John Free
    John Free

    Blown away I am not at all wrong. He ‘provides a service’ for straights -making personalised wedding cakes. He does not provide this service for those that are gay. This is called discrimination. The law should always be above somebody’s misguided conscience.

    Morph as blown away pointed out in his earlier circular reasoning filled comment there are groups that the law protects- homosexuals are one of them, porno lovers are not.

  • freemindfade
    Blown away I am not at all wrong. He ‘provides a service’ for straights -making personalised wedding cakes. He does not provide this service for those that are gay. This is called discrimination. The law should always be above somebody’s misguided conscience.

    If you knew someone hated gay people and was being forced to make you a cake, would you as an individual really want a cake from them? You need to think more of the big picture ramifications, the market is going to make these people extinct because gay people will not want to use them and those of us that are not gay non-bigots won't want to use them either.

    The knee-jerk reaction to take away rights can hurt not just them but everyone including you and the gay community, the moral of the story being, be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. And again can you tell me how YOU john free, could tell if a baker, that didn't say anything more than "we are too busy, sorry," is a victory for gay people? The baker STILL discriminates, the only thing changing is his speech. That means no solution was achieved. You will STILL have to find a baker that isn't a bigot to make your cake.

    Its not about feelings its about logic

    Is the goal to stick it to religious people? Or to increase rights for everyone? I want the gay couples to get their cake, and they will. Stop making the government the referee, its not a good move

  • LoveUniHateExams

    He ‘provides a service’ for straights -making personalised wedding cakes. He does not provide this service for those that are gay - this isn't strictly correct.

    According to Morpheus, the baker offered a generic cake to the gay couple, which wasn't good enough for the pair.

    And if a gay person married someone of the opposite sex (e.g. as when happens in the WTS, with one partner being gay/bisexual but choosing 'traditional' marriage), then the baker probably would bake the couple a wedding cake.

  • Simon

    I think equating 'not making someone a custom cake' with 'hating them' is an overreach.

    Does someone typically offer to sell someone a cake to someone they "hate"? I don't think so. He simply disapproves of gay marriage based on his belief according to an interpretation of the bible that is pretty reasonable. That is not hate. Hate would be throwing them out of the shop and calling them "dirty f**s" but ... that ... didn't ... happen.

    People should stop pretending they have been oppressed when they haven't because at some point people will stop caring about real injustices that actually matter.

  • Simon

    Have gay activists targeted any muslim cake shops or black bakeries? If not, why not?

    The crux of this decision was that the baker was unfairly treated because of his Christian beliefs.

  • freemindfade

    Free speech will correct bad speech

  • dozy

    What annoyed me about the Irish case (I'm assuming the Colorado case is similar , though I haven't researched it ) was that this basically a deliberately provocative "set-up". The campaigner could have gone to pretty much any cake shop but he deliberately targeted an evangelical Christian chain and then pretended his "feelings were hurt" and sued them.

    In the UK , campaigning gays have gone to Bed & Breakfasts in private homes that have a similar Christian ethos and booked double rooms , again to trigger court cases.

    I don't really know where this all ends. Frankly if I was the cake shop owner, I would simply have bitten my lip , charged double , maybe "accidentally" sneezed in the cake mix and moved on. Life is too short for long , expensive court cases ( in the Irish case , against a government agency with an infinite supply of taxpayers funds ) that you aren't going to win.

  • jws

    LoveUniHateExam wrote:

    you believe businesses should be allowed to refuse mixed race couples? - no!
    I believe bakers should be allowed to refuse to bake customised wedding cakes for mixed-race couples who are getting married. Then people will choose other, more open-minded bakers and the bakers will lose business. They'll be punished organically rather than by fiat.

    This should be about equal protection. And we do need laws to specifically state that. What if you're a black couple in an extremely racist town? And I have seen those in the south. Where even the coffee shop in the middle of town is called the Koffee Kup Kafe (KKK) and clan rallies are held in the park in the middle of town.

    Going to another baker? There may not be another one in a small town. And being the minority, is it going to hurt his business to boycott the baker? Probably not. In fact, other racists might hear of it and stop in to congratulate him and patronize his shop as a thank you. No. Going to another baker or advertising his bigotry isn't going to ruin a baker in many cases. Just like when our president makes highly corrupt appointees and does business with them. The corruption, like the racism, isn't the bug, to them, it's the feature.

    Look at Chick-fil-A. Their anti gay practices caused a wave of Christians to patronize them even more. So much for your idea.

    The reason many racist practices were stopped is the government forced them to stop. The job of the government is to protect equal rights for ALL, not just the majority. Your "organic" solution could have taken hundreds of years.

    Not buying it.

    But, like SBF says, a lot of this bigotry is going away. The country is becoming more tolerant. And Christianity is on the decline too. Yes, there will still be pockets of people that are the result of mental inbreeding. I don't know if I'll see it all gone in my lifetime. But then again, I never expected to see gay marriage legalized. Nor pot legalized in so many states. We could reach a tipping point to where all of this old thinking just washes away!

Share this